RongzomFan

Debunking a Creator

Recommended Posts

 

None that you're able to follow :)

Yes, we all know every NeoAdvaitin thinks they are the second coming of Jesus.

 

I've been saying it for years.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, we all know every NeoAdvaitin thinks they are the second coming of Jesus.

 

I've been saying it for years.

 

You're entitled to hold whatever belief you choose - right or wrong :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You're entitled to hold whatever belief you choose - right or wrong :)

You are the bear on the right.

 

Edited by RongzomFan
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a serious note, the only benchmark is happiness.

 

That's what everyone wants but they look towards the apparent objects (the 10,000 things :)) instead of what they already have eternally, the Subject - Consciousness, the Self, Atman (the Tao :))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Self is not the aggregates, because the aggregates are plural, yet self is singular.

 

Also we say "my body" which indicates possession of the aggregates by self.

 

But if the self is something other than the aggregates, you should be able to observe that the self and aggregates are completely distinct and have no relationship. But in actuality they occur together.

 

In the end, self is not established.

Edited by RongzomFan
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. But in actuality they occur together.

 

2. In the end, self is not established.

Fully agree with number 1. but number 2. is an oxymoron.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every Neoadvaitin, like James Swartz, Jeff Foster, Anadi etc., think all the other Neoadvaitins and Buddhists don't "get it".

 

Irrelevant - even if I were a neoadvaitin :)

 

Self is not the aggregates, because the aggregates are plural, yet self is singular.

 

Also we say "my body" which indicates possession of the aggregates by self.

 

But if the self is something other than the aggregates, you should be able to observe that the self and aggregates are completely distinct and have no relationship. But in actuality they occur together.

 

In the end, self is not established.

 

Where you're going wrong here is in the assumption that the Self is singular when it is actually non-dual and all the apparent objects are also the Self.

 

It is not completely wrong to say that All is Empty (although, ultimately, any statement about non-duality is wrong :))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every Neoadvaitin, like James Swartz, Jeff Foster, Anadi etc., think all the other Neoadvaitins and Buddhists don't "get it".

 

James Swartz teaches traditional vedanta in the lineage of Swami Chinmayanada and Dayananda, it's certainly not neo advaita.

 

Anyway, I'll butt out again ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are the writings of James Swartz higher than translations of medieval Advaita Vedanta?

 

http://www.amazon.com/The-Essential-Vedanta-Treasures-Religions/dp/0941532526

 

Not higher, but same sampradaya. When he teaches he teaches directly from the Bhagavad Gita, Shankara, etc, unfolding them sentence by sentence as was taught him.

 

Thanks for the link, that book looks cool :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

James Swartz teaches traditional vedanta in the lineage of Swami Chinmayanada and Dayananda, it's certainly not neo advaita.

 

Anyway, I'll butt out again ;)

 

RongzomFan chooses to employ "neoadvaitin" as a term of abuse.

 

I've pointed his error out to him on several occasions but it doesn't accord with his predjuces, as he's also asserted that only Hindu priests are "advaitins" and that all others are "neoadvaitins".

 

I've also posted this link: -

 

http://www.advaita.org.uk/teachers/teachers.htm

www.advaita.org.uk/teachers/teachers.htm)

 

several times - for others - as RongzomFan is completely unable to grasp the fact that there are several different, albeit overlapping, camps :)

 

Feel free to butt-in - it's nice to have an intelligent contribution :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If everything is self, hop into my body right now

 

Another logical fallacy, here are a few things for you to consider:-

 

Firstly, if everything is Self, that's already the case.

 

Secondly, if, as you attempt to assert, Self don't exist, there would be nothing that could hop.

 

Thirdly, I find the view from here infinitely preferable to the view from there :).

 

Fourthly, this Path is clearly not for you :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gatito, I'm not surprised that your obsessed with Brahman - the real question is why do you want to try to impose your Brahman on everyone else? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.